Deployed US Navy Has a Pregnancy Problem, and It’s Getting Worse

A record 16 out of 100 Navy women are reassigned from ships to shore duty due to pregnancy, according to data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group.

That number is up 2 percent from 2015, representing hundreds more who have to cut their deployments short, taxing both their unit’s manpower, military budgets and combat readiness. Further, such increases cast a shadow over the lofty gender integration goals set by former President Barack Obama.

Overall, women unexpectedly leave their stations on Navy ships as much as 50 percent more frequently to return to land duty, according to documents obtained from the Navy. The statistics were compiled by the Navy Personnel Command at the request of TheDCNF, covering the period from January 2015 to September 2016.

The evacuation of pregnant women is costly for the Navy. Jude Eden, a nationally known author about women in the military who served in 2004 as a Marine deployed to Iraq, said a single transfer can cost the Navy up to $30,000 for each woman trained for a specific task, then evacuated from an active duty ship and sent to land. That figure translates into $115 million in expenses for 2016 alone.

“This is an avoidable cost and expense, leaving a gap for other people to pick up the work slack,” Eden said.

“A pregnancy takes you out of action for about two years. And there’s no replacement,” said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a nonpartisan public policy organization. “So everybody else has to work all that harder,” adding that on small ships and on submarines, “you really have a potential crew disaster.”

“Just as we deal with other unplanned manning losses due to injury or other hardships, we work to ensure that pregnant service members are taken care of and that commands are equipped to fulfill their missions when an unexpected loss occurs,” he said.

In January 2015, 3,335 women were pregnant aboard military vessels, representing about 14 percent of the 23,735 women then serving such duty, according to the data.

But by August 2016 that number reached nearly 16 percent, an all-time high. The Navy reported that 3,840 of the 24,259 women sailors who were aboard Navy ships were pregnant.

The Obama administration understated the pregnancy problem throughout its eight years and even suppressed some data about the impact of its “gender-neutral” policies on the Navy.

For decades, for instance, the Navy published results from exhaustive surveys of 25,000 men and women in a document called the “Navy Pregnancy and Parenthood Survey.”

The reports once were 75 to 100 pages long and disclosed attitudes among men and women and their behavior. However, the Obama administration published only brief two to three-page summaries from 2012 onward.

A civilian attached to the Navy Personnel, Research, Studies and Technology group, which researched and published the surveys, told TheDCNF full reports were completed regularly even though it’s detailed findings were not released to the public. The individual requested anonymity.

“The military has been tight lipped over the years about these numbers. They don’t like to publicize them,” Eden told TheDCNF.

The Navy has been dogged for years by lingering claims that some women get pregnant simply to avoid deployment.

“We all know that happens. Women do it to avoid deployment,” Eden told TheDCNF.

“There do seem to be coincidences,” said Donnelly. “There is a lot of anecdotal evidence.”

“This information is considered so sensitive. You just don’t talk about it. And you don’t ask. It’s just something that everybody knows occurs. Don’t ask, don’t tell,” Donnelly said. She served on the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and on the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces.

The sudden departure of pregnant women aboard military vessels severely hurts military readiness and morale for those left behind and who must pick up the slack. The expecting sailors must be transferred from a ship after the 20th week of pregnancy.

The Navy officially considered pregnancy incompatible with military service and women who became pregnant were automatically discharged, according to The Alliance for National Defense.

However, with the introduction of the all-volunteer military, the Navy provided many lucrative incentives to men and women — including free housing, medical care, recreation and educational opportunities.

But women got additional benefits, including free prenatal care, daycare, counseling, and special education for toddlers and children with disabilities or for other “special needs.”

“Since benefits offered to recruits who are women are so very generous, it almost becomes an incentive,” said Donnelly. “One feminist advocate many years ago referred to the military as a ‘Mecca for single moms.’”

“I think there are so many carrots. The military has become a modern-day jobs program,” Eden said.

Obama, during his eight years in office, sought to increase dramatically the number of women on ships.

In May 2015, Admiral Michelle Howard announced a quota of 25 percent of women on all ships. “We’re going back and looking at the ships — all of them — and what percentage of women are on the ships. Over time, we’ll modernize them to make sure we get to about 25 percent on each ship,” she said.

Former Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in September 2015 pushed the new policy, stating that the Navy SEALs and all other combat jobs in the Navy should be open to women, with no exemptions as part of the Pentagon’s new “gender-neutral” employment policy.

Eden believes the policy of increasing women on ships results in failure. “It’s bad policy when you think of ships that have to be battle-ready and then have to transfer women off for pregnancy — something that has to do with controlled behavior or voluntary behavior,” she said.

It is unclear how President Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis will handle women in the military. He has been a skeptic, but also said during his confirmation hearing he would support a combat role for women.

The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.

Kevin Carr

Who didn’t see that coming? Even though I was Air Force, I saw the same thing on deployments, and even heard chatter by some of the women, that they would get pregnant just to get an early ticket home (with no penalty). Another member of their unit would then be sent to take her place, Obama just made it possible to be more widespread.

ace

Women getting pregnant? How about saying instead men getting women pregnant? The military needs to up its game in establishing child support orders where the s*x was voluntary and press rape charges where it was not. Just name the father as a condition of not receiving a bad discharge and loss of future benefits.

Kevin Carr

True it takes two, but if the women are filling critical positions, she is the one taken out not him. I have seen before in the USAF and it happens in the other services, some of the women talked about getting pregnant so they won’t have to deploy or so they can get an early trip home. It has happened and still does.

ace

True! What I’m suggesting is that both should have consequences – and the parent who does the caretaking should receive child support. Women who are deliberately trying to find someone to get them “knocked up” should receive disciplinary action. Women who are forcing themselves on men are committing assault just the same as when a man forces themselves on a woman. If the military started enforcing consequences, both would consider twice and three times before engaging in risky behavior and, mitigating such behavior if they choose to take the risk. The culture of wink and nod is what produces lack of military readiness.

Kevin Carr

The issue is women getting pregnant to get out of deployment, she can find a non military type to do that. It is about those that game the system to not deploy or go home early.

ace

As I’ve said elsewhere, there should be consequences.

Michael Gore

I think a major difference is that a man does not diminish in his battle capacity merely because he has fathered a child. After all, he doesn’t have to physically go through pregnancy. The military’s chief concern ought to be remaining mission capable, not becoming a proving ground for Liberal Social experimentation.

Keep in mind that in the military, you could get docked serious pay if you got a SUNBURN so bad that it prevented you from wearing a proper uniform or carrying out your duties. Service members have signed over much of the control of their lives to their superiors while in the service and are not free to conduct their selves in any manner they choose.

That being said, when my unit deployed to Afghanistan for a year, there was a lot of fooling around that happened just from taking a bunch of men and some women (infantry unit + HQ support) and putting them in a foreign location in close quarters, with high stress for a long period of time. It’s just a lot of human nature that isn’t going away. It wasn’t right, and it does damage to unit morale and cohesiveness, but it happens.

Rick Nelson

It takes two to tango. The blame should not be solely on just male or female. Both are responsible for there own actions. Just saying…

ace

Exactly!

blackfeather

yep…we knew there would be some swollen bellies when the women got into the military…just like any other situation where “spawning” can take place….this will happen anywhere.

Seamrog

One of the many reasons women do not belong in any mission critical position in the military.

The more mental and physical gymnastics we have to do to justify this mess, the weaker our military becomes.

Certainly women can serve honorably and courageously, but they do NOT belong on ships or in any combat unit and should never deploy.

The irony of the democrats claims of a ‘war on women’ is staggering.

Lady Draon

I’ve been on three deployments and I have never been pregnant or flown off. I love serving my country and sailing around the world.

Don’t discriminate against my sex because people aren’t responsible or they want to have a family.

When I deploy, I protect you against ballistic missile threats that Iran and North Korea launch. I protect 200 + sailors when I stand my watch.

eddiestardust

Not everyone is you…

Annbrosha

just like every female is using pregnancy to avoid deployment? I think instead you should be thanking her for her service and protecting you.

Zachary Hebert

Thank you very much for your proud service. I would go so far too say the problem isn’t really the planned pregnancies of responsible women. I’ve seen 2 women get pregnant on deployment. The problem is always those manipulating the system. That’s not to say men don’t have ways of manipulating the system either. I’ve heard of guys breaking a leg or some serious but not so permanent injury that could make them non deployable as well. We preach honor courage and commitment, but it’s unfortunately not a prerequisite.

The difference is that men who manipulate the system like that to get out of deployment are (rightfully) shamed as cowards and less-than men. Very often they are (or used to be) booted out of the Corps.

Women who manipulate the system to get out of deployment are not shamed. Idiot men leap to their defense. Not only are these cretins NOT booted out of the service, but they are given the red carpet treatment as a reward for being the non-hacking weak link and violating their fellow service members.

If we MUST allow women in the military, keep them out of combat arms.

Even in my rare interactions with pogue units that had females, it was common for them to play the weak sister, and get some guy to do the heavy lifting for them.

Equality means you pull your own weight, and do the same job. If you can’t pass the same PFT, you do not rate to do the job.

Seamrog

Did you even read the article?

Sixteen percent (16%!!!) of women serving on ships were pregnant.

You may be a wonderful sailor, but the reality is that women in forward positions weaken our military. A pregnant woman in combat will not be fighting to protect the person beside her. She’ll be fighting to protect the person inside her, and that are two totally different motivations that WILL result in totally different outcomes. That is simply human nature.

It is this same nature that will change men’s motivations during combat also. He will naturally lean towards protecting the female first, and that will be deadly in combat.

It is human nature, and it is not suited for war.

Rogue Banshee

As soon as a female is found pregnant she walks or is flown off the ship and is assigned to a period of shore duty, just like someone who is seriously injured.

Combat females are trained just like the males. Not every male is gonna cloud his judgement to defend a specific member of his unit over the whole.

Google “woman warriors”. This isn’t a new notch in humanity’s existence of women fighting in wars. Other countries today have trained women soldiers, this is just a renewed concept in American culture.

Kevin Carr

The stats don’t bear out. When I was deployed to Saudi, the 1ST Sgt told me they were trying to figure out what to do about the pregnancies, in a month 33 females were sent home due to pregnancy. As for the warrior attitude, great glad you have it. The most recent Marine Corp testing showed even mix gender units were not as lethal as all male. The all male units were faster at completing the objectives. Men and women are not the same. I know of a Sgt that was in Afghanistan, the Humvee was hit by an IED, both his legs were broken, he weighed 220 by himself, he had 50lbs of gear on, one of his team mates carried him to safety, he believes as I do, if that team mate had been a woman he or both of them would have died. This is not the place for social engineering. Sorry to get off point but you interjected a few off point issues. I respect you for your service.

Seamrog

“Combat females are trained just like the males. Not every male is gonna cloud his judgement to defend a specific member of his unit over the whole.”

The first statement is one you know to be false, and it is regrettable that you would make that claim here.

The second is a strawman argument. I did not say every male would have clouded judgement

I AM saying most will. It is biology, it is human nature, it is part of the Natural Law written on your heart and mine.

It’s a shame that’s the position you took.

Erika Felix

The numbers are disappointing but you do realize on the other end of the spectrum, 84% are mission ready. Don’t be douche and assume you know what women are capable of. No branch should adjust their standards to allow women in certain fields but completely denying women for the small percentage now that’s stupid.

Seamrog

16% is not a small percentage. It is devastating, as the article points out.

Without the lowered standards, women would have no chance of serving, and they have absolutely no place in forward positions and combat units.

I appreciate that you have to name call to make your point, and it demonstrates the weakness of your argument.

There are numerous studies to reinforce the points the author make, as well as the points I am making. They are documented facts, that everyone must ignore inorder to justify the social engineering experiments that have been implemented to weaken our armed forces. The outcomes were realized.

We are a demonstrably weaker – physically, morally, and in our capacity to fight and win wars.

Kevin Carr

While it may be a small percentage based on what the number looks like, if they are filling a billet that is critical and the numbers are not huge, if they can’t go, it degrades readiness. As noted before some have gotten pregnant so they don’t have to go to some rathole location or to sea, or get pregnant while there and get an early trip home. As for the Navy the early trip home usually means they operate short. In some cases somebody else from that person’s home station was sent to replace them, all very costly and the guys usually end up picking up the slack and they better not say anything about it.

Rogue Banshee

If an individual chooses not to get deployed, regardless of gender, they will find a way. I had a guy willing to pay me $200 to push him down a ladder well. I didn’t because that is shitbag behavior. During my first deployment a guy tried to shove himself through a porthole in the smoke pit to kill himself by going overboard. (We stopped him, calmed him down, then he tried it again.) Right before my second deployment 2 females in my division got knocked up on purpose and a male in another division ate a bullet in his home a week prior. Another male crushed his forearm “accidently” while helping a friend change a tire (he told his friends how his other friend helped him break it). There was a female whose recruiter told her she would be an officer in a year due to her teaching degree. She played the crazy card when she found this wasn’t gonna happen and dyed her hair white then pink. They sent her TAD everywhere until each couldn’t handle her anymore. From mess decks, MWR, to berthing crew where her constant naps in her and other people’s racks (beds) became “this I how I pray to my God.” Got kicked out on inability to cope with military life. Another guy became a legend for playing crazy by constantly dribbling an imaginary basketball EVERYWHERE no matter what was going on. He finally got kicked out too. Upon leaving the ship for the last time he dribbled his imaginary basketball a few times, winked, and “passed” it to the nearest watchstander and walked normally off the ship. Letting everyone watching know, with mouths agape, it was all a ruse to get out of the military.

There is more but the point is, people that can’t hack it will always find a way to dodge the military responsibilities. Males and females. We were already picking up the slack for these people before they even left.

Kevin Carr

While true the numbers are greater for females getting pregnant not to deploy.

Niko Bella-Khouf

Who can blame them for wanting out? They were lied to about why they should enlist. That was the original shitbag move.

Rogue Banshee

I went on 3 deployments within 4 years time, on an aircraft carrier. I’ve already proven my worth many times over. I’m not weak, whiney, nor fragile. I am not unique. There are many more females like me whose genitals aren’t an issue in getting the job done. When a fellow female purposely gets pregnant to ESCAPE a deployment, it was definitely frowned upon by everyone. The few females that did this were typically a shitbag workers anyway. The male version is to fake mental illness, break something, or play the suicidal card. The males and females that are prone to this type of personality fault are perfectly capable of doing vast array of jobs but do not have the proper mentality for it. If we continue to cultivate a society where half of our people are conditioned that they are weak in every faculty, will they not in turn raise the next generation to be weak as well? So while everyone has their own personal limitations, being a female isn’t a disability. I’m proud I was able to serve in the military instead of being severely limited to by someone else’s generalised perceptions.

Seamrog

I am sorry, but there is much documented evidence that women in forward positions and on deployments weaken our fighting ability.

Stating that does not diminish your service to our great country. You are to be honored for that, and I as an American citizen thank you for it, and honor you for it. It is to your credit.

Facts are facts – not generalizations, and they cannot be ignored, particularly in regards to our national defense. Your genitals certainly may not be an issue, but your bone structure, your strength, your endurance and your ability to maintain those over time ARE an issue. That is indisputable, and not offered to be pithy or insulting. It is biological fact. Here’s another: men and women behave differently – both from each other, and when around each other. Women in forward and combat roles DOES EFFECT units. Not only morale, motivation and effectivness, but also under pressure. A wounded woman will cause men to behave differently than a wounded man. A pregnant woman will cause EVERYONE to behave differently. That is not a good thing. I hope you are sincere enough to admit that.

I am proud you were able to serve in the military also. I regret that our culture put your out front, and in danger. I hope that will end. For your sake, and for our country’s.

Under the Sea

aka your a lesbian and you only make up 3% of the 100% of the women in the military.

squishee

This is our first line of defense? Women? Really? What kind of man would stand to have a bunch of girls to defend him?

JoAnna Marie

You do, actually. Be proud of it.

squishee

The only woman defending me is the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Sonja Tam

Every male in this country not serving in the military. You’re welcome.

squishee

Already did. Don’t remember any skirts in the mud and blood. Saw one once though at the hospital wearing all white with a white cover. She was very pretty.

Todd McMillin

Actually, for the past 75 years women have served with men in the US Military there Squishee or did you forget the WACs, the WAVEs, and other groups that helped. As well as nurses and female doctors who served in combat roles. But I guess being a dumb grunt that brain damage from the TBI makes your memory as short as your IQ.

Rogue Banshee

Who gives a flunk whether you found her attractive. When I went to sign up for the Army for an active combat role, like my brother, I was denied that specific opportunity because I am female. Little did I know there were loopholes. So I decided to join the Navy as a yellow shirt on an aircraft carrier. You know what I saw sailing around the world? Other nations respecting their own females serving in combat roles. What a black eye it is returning home to America and being told to thank my father/boyfriend/husband for his service when they see my veteran clothes at a parade or festival. But I didn’t do this for honor, or attract a mate with my uniform. I served because I knew it was right for me. I did what your pretty nurse did by taking a supporting role but in assisting the boots on the ground to get bomb strikes via aircraft; wishing all the time that I was the one in those boots making a bigger difference in the outcomes. While some men would feel emasculated to have ‘girls’ defend them, wouldn’t you think us stronger having EVERYONE capable of defending each other? Years ago my brother’s ASV was ambushed and flipped over, half destroyed. My brother was knocked temporarily unconscious (he was turrent). His female fellow MP defended everyone until the non-injured regained their senses. My brother joined her and another male in a firefight for their lives until help arrived. This is not unusual and she did her duty as would another soldier. (The male officer that cowardly refused to feed my brother the ammunition during the ambush was injured and reassigned and given the praise. No one in the unit told the uppers of his cowardice, insuring he would get get the hell out of their unit.) So while I respect your service, I don’t respect your outdated opinion.

Niko Bella-Khouf

Welcome to what? You’re not there for us

Sonja Tam

“But women got additional benefits, including free prenatal care, daycare, counseling, and special education for toddlers and children with disabilities or for other “special needs.”” This frustrated me the most. Prenatal care is medical which every service member gets… Daycare is NOT free to men or women…counseling and education for special needs kids is offered to both males and females so none of the above mentioned are additional benefits to women. Get the facts straight before you write things like this!

eddiestardust

Good enough reason for women NOT to serve!

Kevin Quillen

wow. who would have guessed this would be a problem? (sarc)
women should not be in the service at all. Or on the police forces. (office jobs excluded)

Zachary Hebert

The military is attempting to adopt a transgender acceptability policy in the military. Some sailors honestly don’t know what to think about the program. One day a male sailor serving along side you decides he wants to be a woman, and a year later he can go through the surgery and do so, and vice versa. My opinion is if you are willing to stand beside me defending this country, and even take a bullet for me and my brothers in arms, it shouldn’t matter what is between your legs. However, on the flip side, I hate to impose the steriotype that women get pregnant to get out of deployment, but early in my career I met a female who had her first child to get out of deployment and had her second child to get out of her second deployment. I do know women who planned their pregnancy around wanting to have a family, and attempted to take shore duty along those lines to alleviate detriment to a ship. A woman who does that, I have great respect for. HIPPAA what it is today, medical can’t even discuss a tooth ache with the chain of command with out patient permission. I feel like there is no cookie cutter answer. But if there was a way to weed out those manipulating the system or a program that better works on behalf of the navy and the potential mothers to prevent gaps, that would be best.

Caivs Ivlivs

It will never work. Armies requires men in full mind & body strength, not this alphabet joke.

Niko Bella-Khouf

Yes, the military doesn’t want people with prescrambled minds; they want the honor of scrambling your mind and body after you enlist. lol

Which policy are your referring to? The transgender policy, HIPAA, or the pregnancy policy. I do understand the full extent of all three of these policies, however I was only trying to simplify them as much as possible to alleviate a very lengthy post, and prevent taking away from the original topic being discussed.

Susie Bennett

1) It is not a pregnancy problem; it is a work force availability issue
2) Whaaah Whaaah (baby cries) Businesses have learned how to manage this for years. Staff up, nimrods, and figure it out. I work in HR and we plan staff based on a number of possibilities; loss of staff due to illness and maternity leave being some considerations.

This language leads to discrimination of women in the work place. I never had kids but if men had to deliver babies we would have paid leave of absence from the moment of conception until the child was 18. This is a problem because they haven’t figured out a better staffing model. Would it be an issue if 100 men had the same type of cancer that took them to land for 2 years? Women are the only ones able to have kids. Equalize the playing field and stop calling it a problem!

Intro Introspicere

Actually.. the problem IS because of these women becoming impregnated and having to be reassigned..If it was because of people losing limbs.. They would say there is a problem with the navy having people loose limbs -_-
As much as you want to skate around the issue.. The military isnt like working in a corp business.. They have a limited amount of people who have been trained for specify roles. 14% of active military personal.. Isnt 2 or 3 people missing work because of illness.. or 4 people calling out for a few days..

Also, im not sure how you can said it leads to discrimination of women in the work place when YOU stated businesses Have learned how to manage that for years.. THe navy didnt say they wouldn’t train women did they?? The article said they believe INCREASING the number of women might be costly IF they have to take 2 years off.. OR have to be resigned living Openings that cant be filled with temp workers.. Equalize the playing field?? Women can become pregnant and not be deployed?? They get special benefits for being a mother?? What playing field isnt equal?? Never mind the facts that women only make up 14%… As well as women dont preform the same as men across the board.. but still what can men do that women cant do in the military???

Caivs Ivlivs

a)”Women are the only ones able to have kids” That’s why they have always kept as far as possible from the front line.

b)”Equalize the playing field and stop calling it a problem!” Will that include the obvious differences of muscle mass, physical endurance, sense acuteness and fight ability?

c)”but if men had to deliver babies”, then they’d be women. Human pregnacy is the most complicated among all mammal phyllum, if women were able to fight (and hunt) as men do, we would have never evolved to bipedism but stay as a quadrupedian animal, living as gnus or deers, no civilization ever.

d)”Whaaah Whaaah (baby cries) Businesses have learned how to manage this for years” Businesses including shooting, bleeding, lost of limbs, grenades, people dying all around you?

one of many

Very curious if access to birth control is part of the problem. Also many times women are raped and don’t report it but end up pregnant and don’t want to answer questions about how they came to be pregnant.

Good looking man

How are these women getting impregnated onboard ships?

Mrs B

Really??

Kevin Carr

Something in the air.

Dennis Harpole

I have seen it first hand on board the USS Eisenhower. Started out with 500 females and by the time we returned we were down to 250 or so. Mostly due to being pregnant either before deployment or during deployment. Women do not be onboard ships unless they can be made to sign a document stating that if they become pregnant during their tour of duty on board a particular Navy Ship that they will be discharged.

Mrs B

Agreed

Rob, Portland

Agreed.

DG

“The Love Boat”, What is the percentage of women sailors getting pregnant on shore duty, and can they get early separation/ discharge, due to hardship from active duty?

Nathan Christensen

This reporter failed to include/explain the full policy, or incorporate 90% of the info he was given from the Navy.
Here is what he was provided:
– The “pregnancy” data includes the 12 month operational deferment time
– Pregnancies on sea duty only represent 2.4% of all those stationed at sea (there are 155,568 total sea duty billets)
– The vast majority of pregnancies are in the junior E-3 & E-4 ranks, who do not often hold critical job or leadership positions, and are more easy to find replacements for than E6-E9.
– Backfills are provided first (ASAP) for those units that are deployed
– There are medical issues that occur with no notice (I.e. not 20 weeks to request a backfill). “Friction” (LIMDU, IAs, other issues) in the Navy has declined in the last decade
– The Navy has experienced some of the highest manning levels in recent history. In Dec. 2016, 97.2% of all sea duty billets were filled.

– No clue where this line came from in the FOIA data: “Overall, women unexpectedly leave their stations on Navy ships as much as 50 percent more frequently to return to land duty, according to documents obtained from the Navy.” Grossly misleading.

1. Irrelevant, it is still a loss, and on some vessels with a 12 month interdeployment cycle, that is A LOT!
2. That does not change the 16% of women. 2.4% on an already undermanned vessels (the Navy is full of those) is a 2.4% ADDITIONAL loss in manning. That also means someone on another vessel (who may have just returned) or who is on shore duty is going to have to pick that up, so double the effect at least to 5% or 1 in 20.
3. Great, the vast majority of manning tasks are done by, guess who E1-E5. Easier =/= Easy, especially in undermanned rates (which the Navy has plenty of on Sea Rates)
4. Define fast! 6 months? That is normal ETA for a unexpected loss at the fastest, which just happens to be the length of the nominal deployment. (go figure). I don’t know where you have got your “replacements” but on Submarines, suck it up chuck, we’ll get one to you sometime!
5. As a baseline the Navy and its Commands already have a heavy enough load to deal with the prior existing unexpected losses, adding more is not going to make that situation any better.
6. Really? Did YOU account for the Navy reassigning its manning structure to reduce its undermanned status? (e,g, just deciding that chronic undermanned division of say 85-90% were suddenly deemed at or near manning as their billets were reduced over the course of several years, despite deployment rates increasing and inport times decreasing? 10 years ago Submarine Sonar manning was 16, we never saw that number often usually 13-14 was what you got, and you dogged the watch as needed. So about 5 years ago or so it was suddenly lowered to 14, and suddenly Sonar is “manned”, though, the actual watch requirements stayed the same and now dogging the watch is the norm on deployments. But hey, NAVPERS say they are manned right!

MK75Gunner

Pay no attention to Nathan Christensen, he’s a one comment hack with an agenda. Those of us that served at sea and those of us that served before the SJW’s forced this disastrous agenda on us know the truth.

Rob, Portland

Amen brother.

Bama64

Sorry my friend. I’m not sure what branch of the military you’re talking about but there are no immediate backfills and that’s a fact.

Bama64

These figures are so incorrect. In 2000 I was assigned to a CVN and within two weeks before our deployment we shuffled to reassign 34 woman throughout the ship to shore activities due mostly to pregnancies. In 2002 we had to do the same, but the number was a bit lower. The one thing this article is spot-on about is the fact when a female Sailor leaves there are no replacements. It is such a burden at times it is almost impossible to cover, but we did.
I know of a command that served as a limited duty assignment for pregnant women. At one-time they had 104 pregnant females assigned with nothing to do.
I spent almost 30 years on active duty and I can honestly say the governments mixed gender experiment is and has been an utter failure. My first 9 deployments were all men and we got the job done! My last two deployments were with a mixed crew and I found myself spending half my time looking for my Sailors because they were either out “chatting” it up with their girlfriends or e-mailing back and forth.
Better yet, what wasn’t mentioned was pregnancies underway and the burdensome cost of sending them home.

Under the Sea

Well said brother… /salute

Rob, Portland

Absolute truth.

Niko Bella-Khouf

Well at least we know that not all sailors are gay lol

Elena

Women do not belong on combatant vessels nor in combat arms on the ground.

Those in flying status who are deployed aboard carriers with an air wing are officers and should pledge to avoid pregnancy. Pregnancy should add to the service commitment of said officer should she become pregnant while deployed aboard a carrier.

Sign-Up for Updates

The national daily championing freedom, smaller government and human dignity. The Stream offers a rich and lively source for breaking news, Christian inspiration and conservative commentary while challenging the worst in the mainstream media.